Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 3 of 3 items for

  • Author: Kelly A. Wilson x
Clear All Modify Search
Restricted access

Wesley J. Wilson, Luke E. Kelly and Justin A. Haegele

Purpose: To examine how physical educators and adapted physical educators make decisions regarding the implementation of the least restrictive environment law and what factors influence those practices. Methods: This study utilized a descriptive survey design through an online platform. Participants included 78 teachers (30 physical educators and 48 adapted physical educators). Descriptive statistics and group comparisons through a multivariate analysis of variance were conducted. Results: A significant difference in the implementation of the law between physical educators and adapted physical educators was detected, F(44, 33) = 2.60, p = .003; Wilk’s Λ = .224, ηp2=.78. Adapted physical educators were more involved in making decisions regarding the individualized education program process and student placement. Access to qualified staff was reported as a major barrier to implementation. Discussion/Conclusion: The implementation of the least restrictive environment law and its barriers are discussed.

Restricted access

Kelly A. Wilson, Jenelle N. Gilbert, Wade D. Gilbert and Scott R. Sailor

Seventy-two college athletic directors (ADs) participated in a survey about (a) previous experience with sport psychology consultants (SPCs), (b) previous exposure to the field, and (c) attitudes toward sport psychology consulting. ADs were confused about appropriate training for SPCs, highlighted by the fact that 66.7% were unaware of any certification for SPCs. Although ADs’ attitudes toward SPCs did not differ based on previous experience with SPCs, there was a statistically significant difference between ADs who were aware of the Association for Applied Sport Psychology (AASP) and those who were unaware. Results demonstrate the need to educate potential employers regarding appropriate qualifications for SPCs. The discussion culminates with suggestions for future research and recommendations for enhancing effectiveness of outreach programs.

Restricted access

Vivian H. Heyward, Kelly L. Cook, Virginia L. Hicks, Kathy A. Jenkins, Joseph A. Quatrochi and Wendy L. Wilson

Three methods of body composition assessment were used to estimate percent body fat (%BF) in nonobese (n=77) and obese (n=71) women, 20-72 yrs of age, Skinfolds (SKF), bioelectrical impedance (BIA), and near-infrared interactance (NIR) methods were compared to criterion-derived %BF from hydrostatic weighing (%BFHW). Nonobese subjects had < 30% BFHW and obese subjects had >30% BFHW. The Jackson, Pollock, and Ward SKF equation and the manufacturer's equations for BIA (Valhalla) and NIR (Futrex-5000) were used. For nonobese women there were no significant differences between mean %BFHW and %BFSKF, %BFB1A, and %BFNIR. The rs and SEEs were 0.65 and 3.4% BF for SKF, 0.61 and 3.6% BF for BIA, and 0.58 and 3.7% BF for NIR for nonobese subjects. For obese women, mean %BPHW was significantly underestimated by the SKF, BIA, and NIR methods. The rs and SEEs for the obese group were 0.59 and 3.4% BF for SKF, 0.56 and 3.5% BF for BIA, and 0.36 and 3.9% BF for NIR. The total errors of the equations ranged from 5.6 to 8.0% BF in the obese group. It is concluded that all three field methods accurately estimate %BF for nonobese women; however, none of the methods is suitable for estimating %BF for obese women.